Recycling

[Tinn-man]

TLG apparently asked not to make this information public (it was from an invitation-only questionnaire). A previous topic on this issue was removed.

Oh... well I didn't know that. Sorry.

I guess I'll remove the link then.

[squidman85]

I keep all boxes from 2004 year at my wardrobe

[Swash Buckler]

I use the spruces that hold coins together to represent gold nuggets in MOCs. Seems that is the best use of them I have found so far.

Yeah- so do i- when i was a kid i thought that they actually are supposed to be nuggets

I was just organising my parts from my newly built sets and saw that there are many parts that hold other parts together that we normaly throw out.Like the one that holds coins together or the one that holds the keys together.If we could give them back to TLC for recycling it would very eco-friendly.This is just a suggestion.

Gamer.

Idea is good but i usually invent some ways to use them as well in my mocs Also i think TLC uses too much plastic for the bags - there is unnecessarily many of them usually howewer fewer bags would mean larger so pronbably there is not so eco-friendly- but would be easier for us builders- every new set means lots of plasticwrap

[Peppermint_M]

I'm nota huge fan of going green, so I honestly don't care(sorry to anyone else), but if it decreased prices, I'm all for it.

Sprues are another matter, be thankful they aren't like your average gundam sprue!

I keep all my Zoids sprues in a box, they may come in handy in the future as greebls on custom guns/armour.

[Grrr]

Agreed. One thing I have noticed though is that the picture on the box is often roughly the same size as the actual set. I don't know if they do this on purpose, or if it is just coincidental, though.

I have some booklets about the Lego group from the early nineties which state that they aim to include a photo of the set on the cover of the box in the set's 'natural size'. So you are right. However, it was common in the 80's and 90's for the photo to be cropped so that extra rails / airport runway etc where not visible on the cover.

I feel that the current boxes are perhaps 4 times the size they need to be. I can understand the arguement that large boxes appeal more to kids (perceived value), but do the boxes really need to be so deep? Many of the sets (Creator in particular) come in boxes 8-10cm deep, and truely massive width and height. If they half the depth, that halves the volume, without affecting said 'perceived value'.

Also; I feel that the large box phenomenon is a problem because it affect retailer's stocking levels. Toyshops and department stores have about as much shelf space dedicated to Lego as when I was a kid. However, as the boxes have doubled in volume, the store has less on their shelves and in their storerooms. This makes a product more likely to sell out (or not be stocked at all; eg Trains),and represents potential missed sales for Lego. I feel this factor is quite an offset to the perceived value of a big box.

The reason why I say that is becuase there are two types of kids who buy lego; kfols and the kid with the odd few sets. kfols now are still much like we were as children, studying the catelogs indepth and producing lists of set-numbers for their parents to decipher. They are sorely disappointed when the store they get to go to to choose their birthday present doesn't have their desired set in stock, and they are left with second best. This is affecting brand loyalty at a very young age.

As for the sprues and so on, I feel we would be better to collect them up and find someone to make custom parts with them.

[RileyC]

I feel that the current boxes are perhaps 4 times the size they need to be. I can understand the arguement that large boxes appeal more to kids (perceived value), but do the boxes really need to be so deep? Many of the sets (Creator in particular) come in boxes 8-10cm deep, and truely massive width and height. If they half the depth, that halves the volume, without affecting said 'perceived value'.

Also; I feel that the large box phenomenon is a problem because it affect retailer's stocking levels. Toyshops and department stores have about as much shelf space dedicated to Lego as when I was a kid. However, as the boxes have doubled in volume, the store has less on their shelves and in their storerooms. This makes a product more likely to sell out (or not be stocked at all; eg Trains),and represents potential missed sales for Lego. I feel this factor is quite an offset to the perceived value of a big box.

That is a really good theory imo. It seems that the higher priced sets get the bigger boxes to make it look like you are getting more for you money. I find the bigger boxes just plain annoying. I have run out of room where I store my boxes so now I have to put boxes in boxes to save space. Now the 2010 are getting longer in width which I feel is a stupid move

[NorthernKnight]

I would easily buy my Lego in a non printed box from S@H if this would ease the pressure on the environment (and my wallet). Would it be impractical/more expensive to package them like this? I know i once had the option to choose "plain box" from PaB, but never on the sets. Since i just throw my boxes away anyway, i dont want to pay for printing and transport of huge boxes.

The biggest one i got so far was the box for Kings Castle Siege which, cut to pieces, filled two small garbage bags!

[larry marak]

I would easily buy my Lego in a non printed box from S@H if this would ease the pressure on the environment (and my wallet). Would it be impractical/more expensive to package them like this?

Pressure to go green has just been raised considerably for the poor Lego group. At he Nuremburg toy fair Best Lock unveiled their new line, 100 releases for this year that feature bricks made from bio-plastic (ABS is notorious for its failure to degrade) bricks, plastic set boxes with lids that double as baseplates and tub bottoms that flipped over provide a baseplate building table, and a 70th anniversary brick set with replicas of Hillary Pages original locking building bricks included for serious AFOLs.

[CP5670]

I certainly wouldn't want the actual bricks to degrade. That is the product I'm paying for, after all. It should last as long as possible.

[Peppermint_M]

I would easily buy my Lego in a non printed box from S@H if this would ease the pressure on the environment (and my wallet). Would it be impractical/more expensive to package them like this?

Pressure to go green has just been raised considerably for the poor Lego group. At he Nuremburg toy fair Best Lock unveiled their new line, 100 releases for this year that feature bricks made from bio-plastic (ABS is notorious for its failure to degrade) bricks, plastic set boxes with lids that double as baseplates and tub bottoms that flipped over provide a baseplate building table, and a 70th anniversary brick set with replicas of Hillary Pages original locking building bricks included for serious AFOLs.

Oooo. I am going to be spending more money on clones when these things launch.

But I do agree that bricks shouldn't degrade, they are made to last an eternity, irresponsible and lazy people should know better than throwing out their broken or unwanted bricks. Lego lasts forever and should never be thrown in a hole in a ground.

[Rick]

I certainly wouldn't want the actual bricks to degrade. That is the product I'm paying for, after all. It should last as long as possible.

But I do agree that bricks shouldn't degrade, they are made to last an eternity, irresponsible and lazy people should know better than throwing out their broken or unwanted bricks. Lego lasts forever and should never be thrown in a hole in a ground.

Agreed! The number 1 quality toy shouldn't become less durable.

Hmm, if you push this argument, eventually Lego takes over the world (or we run out of oil; a more likely scenario).

[Peppermint_M]

There should be a provison for recycling broken Lego. When a plate snaps, or a brick breaks. I never throw these away, but it would be good if i could recycle them somehow.

[Fugazi]

Being able to buy from s@h in unbranded, plain cardboard boxes is a great idea! I don't save boxes anymore, so I would definitely support it, especially if TLC provide smaller boxes (to save on shipping) and/or they give a small money incentive to buy those 'eco-boxes'.

Bio-degradable plastic bricks is a silly idea however, if it means that long-term stability of the bricks is compromised. But maybe it is not, perhaps it's only in the presence of water that the bricks will start degrading. Either way, LEGO bricks have always been among the more ecological toys ever, given that they can be played with and reused for years and decades, not something you see a lot of with other toys!

[Rick]

Being able to buy from s@h in unbranded, plain cardboard boxes is a great idea! I don't save boxes anymore, so I would definitely support it, especially if TLC provide smaller boxes (to save on shipping) and/or they give a small money incentive to buy those 'eco-boxes'.

They could even experiment with online-only building instructions for the smaller sets.

Bio-degradable plastic bricks is a silly idea however, if it means that long-term stability of the bricks is compromised. But maybe it is not, perhaps it's only in the presence of water that the bricks will start degrading. Either way, LEGO bricks have always been among the more ecological toys ever, given that they can be played with and reused for years and decades, not something you see a lot of with other toys!

Agreed, it would take away some of the core values of Lego. Re-usability and durability.

[Eilif]

There's alot of talk about big boxes here. They boxes are too big, but there are 2 things to remember.

1- Boxes can't be too small. Parents are not going to pay LEGO prices for a small box. It just isn't going to happen.

2-Boxes and packaging have shrunk significantly. Boxes are quite a bit smaller than before, and they don't have the windows, top flaps, and inserts that they used to. Here's something I posted earlier:

I got out my copy of "The Brick" (Go to LEGO.com and get your free copy now!) and brought over some more details about LEGO going greener

New box sizes

-7% smaller

-Designed to pack together better

-54 sizes of boxes made instead of the 85 that were made last year.

-1352 less truck trips needed in europe and 598 less needed in USA

Energy reduction

-Set goal of 10% reduction over next 3 years so that energy use in 2010 will be 90% of use in 2007

-possible areas include manufacturing, packing and shipping...

...Boxes are still big, but they are smaller and less wasteful than ever before

So the current boxes might be wastefull, but real progress is being made and should be noted.

[sologuy369]

Well, I use the coin holders as TREASURE in a Indiana Jones MOC(s).

[rday1982]

Ideas for eco-friendly packaging (and hopefully cost savings that could be passed to the consumer).

LEGO could supply retailers with printed boxes for shelf use, and supply the set to be sold in a plain box with the set number and name only on it. That way, ink is saved.

The "box" itself could be made five-sided (ie: cut off the front face), and the front sealed over with clear cellophane. Cardboard is saved.

Sprues could be sorted and discarded for recycling at the assembly line. Plastic is saved.

Stores could also do more Pick-A-Brick LEGO, which of course is going to save on packaging and transport, as these will arrive in bulk. Ink, cardboard, plastic, and petrol are saved.

Instructions could be made available online in high quality .pdf format - easily able to be printed off if needed - and therefore eliminated from smaller and simpler sets. Or perhaps it would be cheaper to put the instructions on a CD and include it.

LEGO could also make instructions available seperately to sets, so that people could choose either a CD, a booklet, or to go online (and save a few pence) at the checkout.

Stores could collect old, broken LEGO bricks and sprues, and return them to LEGO on the empty delivery trucks, to be melted down into new LEGO bricks. I've noticed that there's a lot of stuff made from ABS these days... perhaps LEGO ought to institute some sort of collect-melt-reuse program for ABS?

Finally, LEGO could look at their manufacturing processes, and see where potential waste is occuring.

Just my two pence worth.

[The Yellow Brick]

Well If you think about it, Lego have cut down on how they package there boxes eg: scraping that plastic tray used to store the Minifigures and the Intresting peices, Getting rid of the other cardboard box they used to store the peices and Scraping the little booklet which showed us the other sets and other themes.

[mobricki]

Maybe the TLG can just trim their top-dollar sets boxes down just a little. It will save room in their warehouse and it will save cardboard.

[splatman]

Stores could collect old, broken LEGO bricks and sprues, and return them to LEGO on the empty delivery trucks, to be melted down into new LEGO bricks. I've noticed that there's a lot of stuff made from ABS these days... perhaps LEGO ought to institute some sort of collect-melt-reuse program for ABS?

Just what I was gonna say. Though, about LEGO stores, not stores in general.

Basically using infrastructure that's already in place, with some adjustment. Bricklink could set up a similar program for those that live too far from a LEGO store. Example: I buy from a BL seller that lives, say, in Montana, and he sends me his sprues and broken bricks along with my order, especially if it won't tip the package cost into the next shipping bracket, and then I take along said sprues and broken bricks next time I shop at the Bellevue Square LEGO Store, and deposit in their sprue/broken brick bin. When their bin is full, it gets sent to TLG.

I totally second the plain box idea concerning S@H orders. Perhaps, pack the sets in bags, made of tough bioplastic, instead. Just make sure the shipping box won't spill its contents.

Not shure how the plain-box idea would work in stores. Though it has potential to change the times. Other comps may follow. Not just toymakers, either. The same way cargo containers revolutionized the shipping industry.

LEGO stores could have a debox option, so customers don't have to lug home those oversize boxes. That might throw their return policy for a loop. Customers can even take empty LEGO boxes to the LEGO stores for recycling. If they're still in good condition, they could be sent back to TLG for reuse. The cases the sets come in can also be reused. Got this idea from Frito-Lay.

I also second the on-line .pdf instructions. If sent on a CD, the .pdf, even for a large set, would probably fit on a 3" CD. It just don't make sense to put on a 5" CD, what will fit on a 3-incher.

[Erik Leppen]

I also second the on-line .pdf instructions. If sent on a CD, the .pdf, even for a large set, would probably fit on a 3" CD. It just don't make sense to put on a 5" CD, what will fit on a 3-incher.

Is a paper book really more expensive than a CD plus the cost of multiple hours of computer on-time every time the set is built up?

I mean, it's funny how we're trying to save the environment by suggesting putting books on computers instead of paper, but conveniently "forget" that computers need electricity to run.

(Also, CDs are ancient. We're in the internet age now.)

The "box" itself could be made five-sided (ie: cut off the front face), and the front sealed over with clear cellophane. Cardboard is saved.

Is cardboard > cellophane?

1- Boxes can't be too small. Parents are not going to pay LEGO prices for a small box. It just isn't going to happen.

Isn't this effect temporary? As in, until a parent notices that those boxes feel a lot heavier for their size?

I like that this discussion is held, but so far the only thing I read that would actually help is smaller boxes. Significantly smaller boxes. You know, those that can just fit the content. Oh, and reduce the number of polybags because that's also getting really out of hand in large sets (thirty for 8110! I mean come on.)

[AndyC]

LEGO could supply retailers with printed boxes for shelf use, and supply the set to be sold in a plain box with the set number and

name only on it. That way, ink is saved.

Really not going to have quite the same 'feeling' for a little kid when they unwrap their birthday present, only to find a dull brown cardboard box with a number on it. Remember the feeling you had as a kid (and maybe even still do) when your eyes scanned over the box for a brand new set, taking in every exciting detail. That's an important part of the product experience and probably worth far more in sales than a little bit of ink ever would be. It also doesn't really 'fit' with the way most stores operate, with the possible exemption of 'catalogue stores' like Argos.

The "box" itself could be made five-sided (ie: cut off the front face), and the front sealed over with clear cellophane. Cardboard is saved.

Cellophane is almost certainly less environmentally friendly and recyclable than cardboard. It certainly is if they're combined since you have to perform the necessary processing to separate them. By contrast just pulping the cardboard is relatively trivial.

Sprues could be sorted and discarded for recycling at the assembly line. Plastic is saved.

That would undoubtedly be an expensive operation (there's a reason the sprues are there in the first place) and unless you have a way to actually recycle those pieces doesn't really help the environment either. Now, I believe TLG can recycle ABS to some extent, so I can only imagine it's the cost that stops them. In the long run it would be better if the sprues could be eliminated entirely, but I guess that would introduce it's own problems for small light pieces like flowers.

Instructions could be made available online in high quality .pdf format - easily able to be printed off if needed - and therefore eliminated from smaller and simpler sets. Or perhaps it would be cheaper to put the instructions on a CD and include it.

How does that work for people without computers? And even when they do, it might well not be in a place where the kids can build conveniently. It'd also really suck if, having received your plain brown box for your birthday then spent all day at school dreaming of your LEGO, you got home to be told you couldn't build your new set because 'Daddy was busy using the computer'.

And it's probably a lot cheaper and more environmentally friendly for TLG to bulk produce instruction sets than it is for people to print them off at home.

Stores could collect old, broken LEGO bricks and sprues, and return them to LEGO on the empty delivery trucks, to be melted down into new LEGO bricks. I've noticed that there's a lot of stuff made from ABS these days... perhaps LEGO ought to institute some sort of collect-melt-reuse program for ABS?

That probably depends on how effectively you can bulk transport such pieces back to your central treatment facilities. There is also the issue of collecting and storing unused bits for potentially long periods of time, depending on how much gets brought in. To some extent it also goes against the 'reusibility' aspect of LEGO bricks, as you're supposed to be encouraged to continually reinvent with them rather than seeing them as a single use thing. Reuse > Recycle.

I mean, it's funny how we're trying to save the environment by suggesting putting books on computers instead of paper, but conveniently "forget" that computers need electricity to run.

For eInk display devices like Kindle, you only actually use power (and only a tiny amount) when changing the contents of the display, so it's not entirely untrue. LEGO instructions on Kindle would be awesome, but they kind of need a colour eInk display for that to be a practical option.

Isn't this effect temporary? As in, until a parent notices that those boxes feel a lot heavier for their size?

Possibly. The psychology involved with things like that is never as simple as it seems. There's also the problem that kids often don't see the value in quite the same terms and receiving a 'big' present is somehow better.